Academic
underachievement is often measured by significant discrepancies between
IQ scores and grades, or between IQ and achievement test scores.It
may also become apparent as a result of unexplained decreases in any
or all of these measures. Each
of these approaches is limited by whether or not the person's true
potential has been adequately assessed in the first place.

For
assessment purposes, individually administered tests of intelligence
and achievement are preferable to group tests for a variety of reasons.
Group tests often fail to provide accurate assessments at upper levels
of intelligence. They may also fail to identify gifted children
who are depressed, anxious, and unmotivated, or simply more profound
thinkers. Even when individually administered tests are used,
the performance potentials of creative students are often higher than
their IQ scores may suggest. In addition, physical disabilities
as well as adverse economic and social conditions may limit the development,
expression

and adequate assessment of children’s gifted potentials.

Without
adequate assessment, gifted children are all too likely to languish
unnoticed and underachieve in educational environments that fail
to meet their special needs. Since gifted students are generally
capable of performing at least one or two grade levels ahead of
their age peers in their areas of talent, they are seldom challenged
to perform in accord with their true potentials. In fact,
these capable students may be considered underachievers even when
they get "good" grades.

Underachievement
is a pervasive national problem that results in a tremendous waste
of human potential, even among our most able students. Studies
have generally shown the dropout rate among gifted high school students
enrolled in regular public schools to be somewhere between 10 and
20 percent.

Treating underachievers all alike just doesn't work. Specific
patterns of underachievement need to be differentially identified
and dealt with

differently
as soon as a problem becomes apparent. Excluding students with physical
disabilities and neurological conditions, there appear to be at least
six different types of underachievers, whose patterns of underachievement
may overlap or occur sequentially. The first five patterns are
listed later in decreasing order of frequency. However, there is no
firm data concerning the prevalence of the sixth pattern, which is
listed last.

It may be outside the scope of this publication to present specific
strategies to help prevent these patterns of underachievement from
occurring. However, regular study times and realistic, positive
expectations  jointly, calmly, firmly, and consistently conveyed
by both parents and teachers  can help to foster academic
achievement in children. Parents’ involvement in their children’s
schools also appears to help children achieve.
However, doing children’s homework for them does not.

In addition, parents need to show love and appreciation for their
children. While a parent of the same sex as the child needs
to serve as a role model for achievement, a parent of the opposite
sex needs to provide simultaneous validation of the child’s competence
and desirability as a member of the opposite sex. This is
true for children of both

sexes. However, in the absence of such validation from their
fathers, girls may more easily succumb to inhibiting, and sometimes
even stunting, social and sexual pressures. They may, therefore,
underachieve in efforts to meet their emotional and social needs.

Don't be too hard on yourself if your child is an underachiever.
Patterns of underachievement can be changed, with professional
help if not without it. The recommendations included in this
publication are based on a synthesis of the research on underachievement
and clinical experience. In implementing these recommendations,
it is very important to make clear distinctions between children
as people and their behavior, as well as to precede and follow constructive
suggestions with positive and encouraging comments.